Table 1 Different methodologies of risk stratification.

From: High-risk disease in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: beyond the R-ISS and IMWG definitions

 

Serum features

Genomic features

Proposed clinical definition of high risk:

% defined as high risk

Definition of high risk

Outcomes based on risk

Additional important notes

ISS [3]

Serum β2-microglobulin

Serum albumin

None

NAa

33.6%

ISS stage III: Serum β2-microglobulin >5.5 mg/L

Median OS (months)

• Stage I: 62

• Stage II: 45

• Stage III: 29

B2-microglobulin: indicative of increased tumor burden and declining renal function

Serum albumin: driven by inflammatory cytokines such as IL-6 and the bone marrow microenvironment

R-ISS [2]

LDH

Serum β2-microglobulin Serum albumin

del(17p)b

t(4;14)

t(14;16)

NAc

10%

ISS stage III and either high-risk CA by iFISH or high LDH

5-year OS:

• Stage 1: 82%

• Stage 2: 62%

• Stage 3: 40%

Stage 3 patients have a median PFS of 29 months and median OS of 37 months [54]

IMWG [5]

Serum β2-microglobulin

Serum albumin

del(17p)b

t(4;14)

+1q21

Median OS <2 years

20%

ISS II/III and t(4;14) or 17p13 del by iFISH

Median OS:

• Low risk: >10 years

• Standard risk: 7 years

• High risk: 2 years

High-risk group with a 4-year PFS of 12% and OS of just 35%

Low-risk group consists of ISS I/II and absence of t(4;14), 17p13 del or +1q21 and age <55 years

mSMART [55]

LDH

Serum β2-microglobulin Serum albumin

Ploidy status

t(4;14) t(14;16) t(14;20)

t(11;14)

t(6/14)

del(17p) and p53 deletion

deletion 13

gain 1q

GEP

NAd

20%

High-risk genetic Abnormalities

• t(14;16); t(14;20);

• Del17p or p53 mutation

GEP: high-risk signature

Median OS:

• High risk: 3 years

• Intermediate risk: 4–5 years

• Standard risk: 8–10 years

• Trisomies may ameliorate high-risk genetic abnormalities

• High plasma cell S-phase also defines high risk: cutoffs vary

• Standard risk includes all others including trisomies, t(11;14), and t(6;14)

• t(4;14): re-classified as intermediate risk

EMC92/SYK92 –MMprofiler [30]

None

High-risk survival signature of 92 genese

Median OS <2 years

18–20%

Two-tiered system of high and standard risk

Reduced OS with HR of 2.06 to 5.23 in validation cohorts amongst the TT2, TT3, APEX, and MRC-IX studies

In multivariate analyses, the signature was proven to be independent of the currently used prognostic factors

UAMS GEP70 or MyPRS [28]

None

High-risk survival signature of 70 genese

"early disease-related death"

13–14%

Two-tiered system of high and standard risk

HR for high v standard-risk GEP:

• EFS: 3.41 (P = 0.002)

• OS: 4.75 (P<0.001)

Standard-risk patients with a 5-year continuous complete remission of 60% vs. 3-year rate of only 20% in those with a high-risk

"Early disease-related death" definition not clear in the primary literature

CoMMpass [19]

LDH

fTP53 mutation

λ-chain translocation

IGLL5 mutation

Time to progression (TTP) of < 18 months

20.6%

TTP < 18 months: high-risk

TTP >18 months: low risk

Median OS in months:

• High risk: 32.8

• ISS III: 54

• Baseline high-risk CA: 65

TTP 18-month cutoff chosen because time to ASCT was ~6 months and many MM studies define early PD as relapse within 12 months from ASCT

Myeloma Genome Project [6, 17]

Serum β2-microglobulin Serum albumin

TP53 inactivation

+1q amp

NAg

6.1%

Biallelic TP53

inactivation or amp of CKS1B (1q21) on the background of ISS stage III

High risk:

• Median PFS: 15.4 months

• Median OS: 20.7 months

1q amplification considered ≥ 4 copies

LDH values were not universally available preventing the calculation of R-ISS thus ISS and IMWG risk criteria were used

Cytogenetics Prognostic Index [9]

None

del(17p) t(4;14)

del(1p32)

1q21 gain

trisomies 3, 5, and 21

NA

11–18%

Prognostic Index >1 defined high riskh

5-year survival:

• High risk: <50%

• Int risk: 50–75%

• Low risk: >75%

The main objective was to develop and validate a prognostic model based on the seven cytogenetic abnormalities

  1. amp amplification, ASCT autologous stem cell transplantation, CA cytogenetic abnormalities, GEP gene-expression profile, HR hazard ratio, iFISH interphase fluorescent in situ hybridization, ISS International Staging System, IMWG International Myeloma Working Group, Int intermediate, LDH lactate dehydrogenase, MM multiple myeloma, NA not applicable/not available, OS overall survival, PD progressive disease, PFS progression-free survival, R-ISS Revised International Staging System, TTP time to progression.
  2. aUnivariate and multivariate analyses were used to explore three modeling approaches with the most significant prognostic factors assessed using the following methods: (1) the weighted variable model; (2) the model based on the number of risk factors occurring in an individual patient; and (3) the survival tree model in which risk factors present at each branch point are sequentially reassessed.
  3. biFISH: early studies showed the power of MM-specific abnormalities on metaphase cytogenetics and their association with inferior survival. This assay relies on the presence of actively dividing cells, and as terminally differentiated B cells, plasma cells have limited proliferative capacity [38]. Consequently, only one-third of MM patients have metaphase cytogenetic abnormalities at diagnosis. Interphase FISH is a more sensitive modality for identifying specific cytogenetic abnormalities associated with inferior survival and is used to depict risk for both the R-ISS and IMWG staging systems.
  4. cUtilized different statistical models to best partition risk. K-adaptive partitioning dedicated to censored survival data (minimax-based partitioning rule by log-rank test) was used for ISS/CA/LDH grouping; this routine gave an optimal number of three subgroups (R-ISS I, II, and III).
  5. dPartitioned into three groups based on data from multiple centers.
  6. eSee gene-expression profile section for further details and references.
  7. fFactors associated in multivariate analyses with time to progression of less than 18 months.
  8. gUtilized different statistical models to best partition risk, please refer to Walker et al. [17].
  9. hRefer to Perrot et al. [9] for more information on how the prognostic index was calculated.